More ticket 'status' needed
Reported by Victor | November 20th, 2007 @ 12:57 PM
Guys, this has gone back and forth a number of times, as bug #277 suggests. I'm opening it up again because this is really causing a problem for us.
TAGS ARE NOT THE SOLUTION. PLEASE RECONSIDER. This has gone back and forth on forums and in your issue tracker itself.
Almost every software company I know has a separate internal "status" for "resolved" and "verified" [by Q/A] ... Just because something is fixed, doesn't mean the fix works and should be promoted to production. It's a WORKFLOW issue, not a TAGs/DESCRIPTION issue.
Dan Powell said it very well in May's ticket:
"Tags work better for categorizing or finding related items. Workflow states that are finite and well defined work better selected from a list so that it's clear what the options are and prevents mispellings losing bugs. The basic open, resolved, verified, closed workflow is simple and easy.
Perhaps allowing accounts or projects to define custom statuses?"
Status is a very important item for us, and obviously its an important item for several customers.
Thanks for your consideration.
Comments and changes to this ticket
-
Will November 25th, 2007 @ 12:40 PM
- → State changed from “new” to “open”
We're trying to work out a more usable solution at the moment. I can't label a timeframe on it, but its def high on the priority list.
Thanks for the input.
-
Will April 22nd, 2008 @ 03:52 PM
- → State changed from “open” to “resolved”
Please Login or create a free account to add a new comment.
You can update this ticket by sending an email to from your email client. (help)
Create your profile
Help contribute to this project by taking a few moments to create your personal profile. Create your profile »
Using Lighthouse to track Lighthouse.
